![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Sockatume 23:35, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I reckon a few screenshots from the pivotal 6th-generation games are needed. Halo, Final Fantasy, whatever. -- 203.214.6.180 11:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
There is a lot of criticism for calling this the 128-bit era as it doesnt make any sense and the bit width has become not very relevant. I propose simply calling the 32/64 bit era as the "3D era" and then this era can be the "3D era generation 2". Alternative ideas are along the lines of the "Online Era"... what do you all think? 17:57, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I have move the article to the discussion page, please continue your discussion there.
What's the justification for calling this a "dark era?" Just because a lot of games weren't good doesn't cut it - every era has had a lot of bad games and a lot of good games. This seems to be opinionated and not factual. Khanartist 22:41, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Is there any such thing as the "128-bit era?" The Nintendo Gamecube uses a 32-bit implementation of the PPC architecture, and the Microsoft X-Box runs on a 733MHz Pentium !!! Coppermine, a 32-x86 implementation. The only 128-bit console currently in production is the Sony Playstation 2, which is also the least powerful, hardware-wise, of the three consoles currently on the market. The Sega Dreamcast was 128-bit, but left the scene after a mere 2 years. 64-bit consoles can be inferior to 32-bit consoles, and vice versa. Instead of grouping eras by "bit," it would be more realistic consoles were grouped by market competition at the time. An abbreviated example would be "SNES and Genesis," "Sony Playstation and Sega Saturn," "Nintendo 64 and Sony Playstation," "X-Box, Gamecube and PS2." Until memory in a console is beyond 4GB, 32-bit is quite sufficient. The X-Box, the most capable of the consoles, has only 64MB of RAM and as mentioned previously, is 32-bit. The next move in the console market will be from mostly 32-bit (X-Box and Gamecube) to 64-bit, not to/from 128-bit to the ludicrious 256-bit.
While the content is alright, I haven't found any outside source that refers to the XBox GC and PS2 part of some 128-bit era. I believe the PS2 had a 128-bit co-processor but the other two are 32-bit architectures. The Dreamcast is the only true 128-bit console. The whole "bit" thing was a marketting ploy that was only a real indicator of more powerful systems from 4-bit up to 32-bit. Calling the next-gen systems 256-bit is bonkers. I'm not sure what the best way to resolve this is. While it doesn't make any sense to call this a 128-bit era (and no outside sources do this that I can see)... I do consider it an era of some sorts. Anyone have any suggestions?
Using the classification current era would leave a problem as soon as the "next generation" came along, and leaves the past eras still open to classification.
The 256-bit era title sounds a bit excessive. Don't think anybody will call it that. Most people won't know what you are talking about it you say "the 256-bit era". I had never seen that term before until coming here. Although this makes me sound like a Sony fanboy, casual gamers will probably relate more if you say "The Playstation 3" era or "the Playstation 4 era" instead of saying "256-bit era" and "512-bit era" respectively. Even saying "The Playstation 2 era" probably provides less confusion than "128-bit era" although personally I don't have any problems with the title "128-bit era". 256-bit era on the other hand.....
I have often seen people calling the 128-bit era the "next generation console" era. Everything else had a bit rating:
However what do you then call the so-called 256-bit era?
-- Prion 18:24, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Fair enough. I had always assumed that some people called it the next generation era because after the 32/64-bit era, the bit rating somewhat became irrelevant (i.e. it was no longer an indication of graphical power. The 32-bit Xbox is the most powerful, the Dreamcast - the only true 128-bit system out of the four is the least powerful, the PS2 is partially 128-bit but less powerful than the 64-bit GameCube, etc.) As well as the fact that now the majority of systems had multiple processors and bus paths that could each differ in terms of bits.
But will the post-128-bit era really be the 256-bit era? Are the PS3, N5 (Revolution) and Xenon (Xbox2) really going to be using any 256-bit components? At this point there's probably not much specifications released for the PS3 cell and N5 CPU. The Xenon will use a G5 PowerPC CPU which I don't think is going to be 256-bit.
--
Prion 12:57, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
All of the consoles of the next generation (IE, ones after the 128-bit era) will be using nearly the same CPU, all made by IBM. None of them will be 256-bit. A 256-bit architecture wouldn't make a whole lot of sense for a console. Timbagas 07:29, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The Sega Dreamcast was the first console of the era and turned out to be Sega's fourth and final video game console
Fourth? Uh... Master System, Genesis, Game Gear, Sega CD, 32X, Saturn, Nomad, Dreamcast... I think I might be missing a couple in there... And I also believe the title of "128-bit era" is a bit misleading, though I can't think of any names that would work better, so I'll just STFU. Garrett Albright 02:55, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
It still says the GameCube is from 2001-present, yet they don't sell new GameCubes in the UK anymore... I haven't seen new Xboxs for sale lately either. Does this count software? I think they have new games coming out for them. JaffaCakeLover 14:56, Oct 8, 2006 (GMT)
Personally I think the list should be split between handhelds and consoles. Does anyone disagree? Also why is the talk page moved to Sixth era of gaming, but not the article itself? I know theres a dispute ongoing still about this, but if the article is at 128-bit, so should the talk page. K1Bond007 20:21, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
I believe this article should be moved to "Sixth-generation era" and "128-bit era" should be redirected to it. For reasons stated above, referring to this as the 128-bit era is absurd. First, bit width is neither a statement of performance nor an expression of technical advancement. Second, few current systems implement 128-bit processors, and so whereas previous generations could be fairly accurately grouped by bit width, calling the current generation "128-bit" doesn't make any real sense. I had never heard of the current generation referred to this way until I came to this page. It shows a lack of understanding of the technical issue.
A redirect would be easy and cheap! You could still type in "128-bit era" and get to the same article. Would it be a big problem if I do this? I'd really like to hear good arguments for retaining the current title. TomTheHand 16:43, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
I agree, the naming scheme doesnt make much sense at 128-bit, and I've never heard this term used in the industry. Timbagas 07:27, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Please do a redirect I have never heard it refered to as the "128-bit era" either. The last bit count that was trumpeted was for the Nintendo 64. "Sixth-generation era" is better but I think I would prefer a naming system based on some time period. Asteron ノレツァ 19:33, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
I was looking over the list of consoles of this era, and I noticed that there are entries for systems such as the Famicon (the ORIGINAL NES in the US) which were SOLD during this era, but which are certainly not OF this era. I'd think that all consoles which did not originate during this era should be removed. Similar changes would need to be made to other era articles. What does everyone think about this? TomTheHand 20:33, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
I also think PSP and DS aren't apart of this generation. Or maybe the DS is, but the PSP isn't. Anyone have a stance on this? K1Bond007 17:34, May 13, 2005 (UTC)
"It should be noted, however, that much of the criticism of video games on these grounds comes from nongames, and such controversies are hardly unique to the sixth generation, and go back at least as far as 1994 with Mortal Kombat and Night Trap."
What is a "nongame", and how does it criticize? FireWorks 04:17, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
I have never heard of this term. Sounds like subjective hyperbole to me. Remove? Shawnc 15:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
All these talks about era are rubbish. I removed the era subsection titles with more sensible names. Xiaodai 06:32, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
Request fulfilled. Rob Church Talk 17:44, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
While I am a big Nintendo fan, and I thought SSBM was a great game, I can't see how it's a milestone. It was a sequel that essentially refined the established aspects of its predecessor. It sold fairly well, but not significantly. If that's a milestone, I would submit that Soul Calibur (Dreamcast) was as much of a milestone. It was the game that sold the Dreamcast and thus ushered in this generation. It was also arguably the first time that the home experience exceeded the arcade experience.
Is the GameBoy Advance Micro Seventh Generation? It was released after the DS, which is undoubtably seventh gen, but it's effectively just a redesigned GBA, sixth gen. I'm not sure whether it should be moved or not. smurrayinchester( User), ( Talk) 15:58, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Several of the games listed shouldn't be in that catagory, a franchise means more than one, and Ico, Crimson Skies, Skies of Arcadia and others are single games. -- Visual77 05:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
I removed Silent Hill from the 'Franchises started' category as the series already started in the previous generation.
Should a game be left in the Franchises Started category if it's sequel is merely in the works? I think God of War and Disgaea should both be removed, along with some others, because while they are part of a franchise tha is in progress, neither one has a released sequel. -- Visual77 02:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The Dreamcast does not recieve representation in the "Sixth Generation consoles" header with an image and time dates. If someone with sufficient skills could add it, I'd be much obliged.
The console sales is very dated. I've heard that GameCube has actually surpassed XBox this generation in North American, and definately world wide. The figures quoted do not include Japan, which GameCubes outsell even XBox360s.
If you go to that link, you'll see the discussions about NPD's data as well as other data. I don't know if the data is good enough, or if we can find better data. These three posts in particular have something to say on the issue:
Any chance we can get real information, or at the very least indicate it's data information that pertains only to English Speaking countries or something? (If it's the NPD's number. I just realized I didn't look at the numbers.)
- Indefual 06:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
This article could really use an example of what graphics look like in this generation. 67.70.154.184 15:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I visited this page for the sole reason of seeing the sales figures of the 6th generation consoles, ir how many units each of Dreamcast, Ps2, xbox, and gamecube were sold worldwide. This is, I feel, a glaring ommision to this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.133.209.129 ( talk • contribs) .
I don't see any reference of the Nintendo iQue. Computerjoe 's talk 21:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey could someone please update that photo of the three controllers side by side? It depicts the old "duke" xbox controller from when they originally released the xbox. The controller S model should be depicted preferably. 207.118.184.170 19:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I've added the Tapwave Zodiac handheld to this page, as it rose and fell in the time frame of the "sixth generation". I'm not sure if it's entirely appropriate here, as it has overall hardware specifications more in line with what are considered to be "seventh generation" handhelds.
Dekaritae 17:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Gamecube was listed as number two in sales on the article and Xbox as number three, but as you can see by the world wide sales Xbox is ahead by about 3 million copies sold... Make sure this stays as is.
12.182.43.173 01:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Several times in this article it is stated that the Xbox is a more powerful system then the PS2 (especially with regards to the system's CPU's). This is simply not true. Did somebody just compare the operating frequencies of the two CPU's and come to the conclusion that a higher number is more powerful? First of all the designs are so different that they can not accurately be compared with one being "more powerful". Each CPU is better then the other at certain tasks. Secondly between the two the PS2's CPU is designed as a game system processor, where the Xbox's CPU is designed as a general purpose CPU. The Xbox's CPU is much less efficient at executing game code then the PS2's CPU. In practice the two CPUs have been roughly equally efficient. Games can be written to be more optimized (more powerful) on the PS2 with the proper effort. However many game studios forgo the effort and phone-in the programing programing leading to a less efficient final result. the Xbox on the other hand has a general purpose CPU that is generally simple to program for, but lacks the capability to optimize the game code like with the PS2's CPU. The bias towards the Xbox should be removed from the article. There is no clearly "more powerful" system between the two.
-- 12.36.118.167 20:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC) the Goat
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
"This era began on November 18, 2001 (with the release of both the Xbox and GameCube)."
This statement is incorrect... I'd change it... but I'm not sure about the exact dates... if the Dreamcast is part of the 6th generation... then according to the dreamcast launch dated list on it's page, wouldn't the start date be... November 27, 1998 or at the very least with the addition of the first true contender in the 6th generation, the PS2...-- Biggman15 18:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, I wouldn't say the Dreamcast wasn't a contender, it lost, but it was a contender. So I think the Dreamcast is probably the best date. DarkGhost89 00:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Something seems wrong with that section. The start of the paragraph states that the Dreamcast is the last console to base its marketing on the bit/byte system. Later in the paragraph it is stated that the Dreamcast and the PS2 are the last console to base its marketing on the bit/byte system. Seems like a contradiction to me, anyone agree? Dionyseus 00:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Just curious, anyone know what the initial sales of the PS2, Xbox, and GCN were?-- 68.81.46.199 01:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Not true, in fact, games were still (and still are!) being produced for the Dreamcast, it even says it on the wiki page! Could someone fix this? Lailaiboy 21:51, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
In the milestone part it says that Soul Calibur is the only game to recieve perfects from GameSpot, IGN and Famitsu but Ocarina of Time also has. RammaYB 02:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
Since the Wii is a Gamecube with an addon, I propose that it be classified as 6th generation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.204.218.137 ( talk • contribs).
Read carefully it says "only game of it genre", Ocarina of Time wasn't a fighting game. 1:26, 15 February 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.54.14.12 ( talk • contribs).
Gamecube vs. Xbox
Microsoft’s numbers are based on RAW performances, which is based on what the console can do without any form of application running.
GCN: 90 million polygons/second (1 light)
Xbox: 116 Polygons/second (no light)-could be strips, or smaller polyps.
Xbox: vertex and pixel shaders (AKA, color combined)
GCN: Flipper LSI TEV (AKA color combined)
Xbox internal GPU bandwidth: 10GB/second (eDRAM and Main RAM have latencies of 20 ns)
GCN internal GPU bandwidth: 20-25GB/second (1T-SRAM has latencies of 3-6 ns)
Xbox maximum texture layers: 4
GCN maximum texture layers: 8
Xbox maximum hardware lights: 4
GCN maximum hardware lights: 8
Xbox maximum local lights: 8
GCN maximum local lights: 8
That is what each console can do in the GPU area. Now this is where most people that do not have the knowledge about a computer, are leaded to believe that a bigger number is better.
Gamecube CPU: 485 MHz
The GCN CPU is a PowerPC based RISC processor, with L1 64 KB and L2 256 KB cache. The Xbox's is an Intel x86 based CISC processor, with L1 32 KB and L2 128 KB cache. RISC processors outperform any CISC processor well over 2:1 if you go by MHz. That's also when there are more-to equal cache sizes. The Xbox's CPU cache is drastically cut from the normal P3's. Only the x86-64 architecture can really compete with the RISC processors per MHz due to more transistors or registers or units on each die. The Xbox is based off x86-32.
So in fact, the GC runs at 960MHz, performance wise!!
Xbox CPU: 733MHz: This is not any CPU; it is actually a PIII/Celeron chip. For more information, look above. This processor also has LESS transistors/registers/cache than the RISC counterpart.
Gamecube Graphics Processor: 162MHz (Read above of what GameCube’s graphics can process. This chip uses the fastest RAM on the planet 1T-SRAM). The power of this card can be compared to the Radeon 9550 128 MB GDDR3 and 9600 XT 256 MB GDDR3. Flipper has 4 Pixel Pipes with 1 Texture units; coupled with the fast RAM and double the hardwired effects; it doesn’t have to waste any extra clock ticks.
Xbox Graphics Processor: 230 MHz (This chip's power would be in-between the GeForce 4 and GeForce FX5200. It has 4 Pixel Pipes with 2 Texture Units, but due to its memory limitations AND texture limitations it has to waste an extra 2 clock ticks when more is applied per scene.
Gamecube Memory: 43 MB of 1T-SRAM (It’s the fastest and most advanced RAM. Don’t forget Cube shares its memory with a Z-Buffer 3 MB, GPU 24 MB, and sound 16 MB). The latency is around 3 ns to 6 ns. Wii has even better developed 1T-SRAM which runs at around 1.4 ns.
Xbox Memory: 64 MB (Xbox uses DDR RAM. it has to share it around the whole system like a PC, same as GC, but due to 30 ns timings, it can cause bottlenecks. It does provide better memory bandwidths, but if bottlenecks occur at the beginning of the whole cycle, then surely the bandwidth in the GPU or DSP or CPU will occur, and hinder system performance.
Gamecube Memory Bandwidth: 2.6 gb/sec RAW and near efficient real world figures.
Xbox Memory Bandwidth: 6.4 gb/sec RAW
Gamecube Polygon Performance: ~22 Million Polygons/sec WITH all effects.
Xbox Polygon Performance: ~20 M polygons/sec
Gamecube Audio Channels: 256 2D/3D channels
Xbox Audio Channels: 256 2D/3D channels WITH Dolby Digital
Pentium 3:
Bus Interface Unit to System Bus = 32 bit * 133 MHz = 1.0 GB/s
Bus Interface Unit from chip: 23 + 2.9 = 25.9 GB/s
L2 Data cache to L1 Data cache: 256 bit * 733 MHz = 23 GB/s
L2 Instruction cache to L1 instruction cache = 32 bit * 733 MHz = 2.9 GB/s
Gekko:
Bus Interface Unit to System Bus = 64 bit * 162 MHz = 1.33 GB/s
Bus Interface Unit from chip = 11.6 GB/s
L2 Data cache to fill buffer 64 bit * 485 MHz = 3.88 GB/s
L2 Instruction cache to L1 instruction cache = 32 bit * 485 MHz = 1.94 GB/s
DMA controller to fill buffer 64 bit * 485 MHz = 3.8 GB/s
Fill buffer to L1 Data cache 256 bit * 485 MHz = 15.52 GB/s
Write Gather Pipe from Load/Store Unit 64 bit * 485 = 3.8 GB/s
But GC has data compression, which Xbox doesn’t have, which results with more work in the north-bridge to allow data compression.
Gekko’s data compression
Data compression of 4:1 average data compression:
Bus Interface Unit to System Bus = 64 bit * 162 MHz = 1.3 GB/s * 4 = 5.2 GB/s
Bus Interface Unit from chip = 11.6 GB/s * 4 = 46.4 GB/s
L2 Data cache to fill buffer 64 bit * 485 MHz = 3.8 GB/s * 4 = 15.2 GB/s
L2 Instruction cache to L1 instruction cache = 32 bit * 485 MHz * 4 = 7.76 GB/s
DMA controller to fill buffer 64 bit * 485 MHz = 3.8 GB/s * 4 = 15.2 GB/s
Fill buffer to L1 Data cache 256 bit * 485 MHz = 15.5 GB/s * 4 = 62.2 GB/s.
Write Gather Pipe from Load/Store Unit 64 bit * 485 = 3.8 GB/s * 4 = 15.2 GB/s
The Gekko architecture is suited much more for streaming a large amount of data then the Pentium 3.
And finally, L2 and L1 cache must be taken into account. The native RISC code on the Gekko makes the instructions bigger then the CISC counterpart, let’s say around 30% larger.
Pentium 3:
L1 Instruction cache: 16 Kbytes * 1.30 = 20.8 Kbytes
L1 Data cache: 16 Kbytes
L2 Instruction cache: 64 Kbytes * 1.30 = 83.2 Kbytes
L2 Data Cache: 64 Kbytes
Total cache: L1 32 KB’s and L2 128 KB’s
In the data caches, transient data, or data making its way back up to the bus interface unit, displaces memory coming into the CPU core. So the above figures are generous, the actual amount of cache dedicated to storing data to be sent to the CPU core is around half that number.
Gekko
L1 Instruction cache: 32 Kbytes
L1 Data cache: 32 Kbytes
L2 Instruction cache: 128 Kbytes * 0.70 = 89.6 Kbytes
L2 Data cache: 128 Kbytes * 4 = 512 Kbytes
Total cache: L1 64 KB and L2 256 KB
Transient data does not displace data coming in, so the numbers above are solid. The outgoing data is stored in these buffers:
The L2 data cache actually available to the Gekko is around 10 times greater then the amount available on the Pentium 3. The Gekko makes use of this bandwidth when operating in vector mode. -- Kendoka Han 00:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Kendoka_Han
I'm wondering if there shouldn't be a mention\section like this. This generation was the begging of online gaming (existed on PC, yes, but consoles were catching up and each had a modem of some kind), wireless gaming (arguably initiated by the wavebird) and multimedia experience (DVD playback was a desired feature, for some reason, when it came to the xbox and PS2). -- Thaddius 15:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Added paragraph on online gaming. Multimedia was arguably started with the PS1's ability to play CDs, but its still a good point. Tehw1k1 18:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Is this correct? It was released at around the same time as the DS and the PSP. Samx 22:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC) It's not, the PSP and DS are seventh gen., but since they're released at the time of the sixth gen. even though handhelds are totally diff. has led people to belive their sixth gen. They have so much more power than the GBA that its not funny that there here. Uber555 23:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't this be added too? Ps3 ability to use any standard 2.5in Sata drive, any bluetooth headset and any external usb hard drive? 201.51.117.222 12:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Since the chart is about the launch of the systems, shouldn't the picture show how the PS2 looked at launch, and not the slim model PS2 that was released years later? Tehw1k1 06:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
-another american article? It seems like you are using a second gen dreamcast photo. There are three versions of dreamcast. The very last hardware case released in 2000 was white and blue controllers/vmus etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.42.105 ( talk) 05:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Trends-market convergence "Major developers such as Activision released games covering the PC, Xbox, GameCube, PlayStation 2, and Dreamcast. Other famous developers (Capcom, Sega, etc.) who released games from previous generations also made considerable enhancements in gameplay and graphics. The PC and Dreamcast made these leaps from the previous generation of consoles. The generation was the first to help console and computer software grow closer together as well as outperform the arcade market in features, graphics and business."
A lot of this seems completely obvious and extraneous. I've been thinking of erasing it, but there are a couple of decent nuggets of info in there. If someone could rewrite it or integrate some of it into another part or the article, the article might read better. Tehw1k1 17:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
NM, I did it myself. Tehw1k1 01:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Kept start, high. This assessment applies to most of the articles in the series as well, but feel free to apply for individual assessment of each article in the series.
When the points above have been addressed, ask for a re-assessment.
As a final point, a large part of this article is about comparing the visual performance of the consoles, and a lot of the discussions I just archived were about that issue. There is only one good way to address this point on Wikipedia, which is to look at third-party (IGN, GameSpot) reviews of the console, then summarize and paraphrase those in the articles about the consoles or a "Comparison of.." article.
-- User:Krator ( t c) 22:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
* Lead section is poor. Too short, and does not accurately summarize and introduce the article. See: WP:LS
Agree, but many other VG articles are similar. It would be best to wait until rewriting the entire article before rewriting the summary, since one will naturally impact the other.
* Something is resizing my Firefox window, and I don't like it. Something like this might immediately turn away a reader.
Adware? Please give details?
* Make a proper infobox, at least including the start and end year.
Good idea. Can you suggest a template/code?
RE: sixth gen-I cant help my cruftiness. I think an article that has a timeline of franchises for all gens would be in order. And what do you think of the interpretation that any game that has at least one sequel constitutes a franchise, or does more staying power or mainstream awareness also need to be considered?
Otherwise agree, but I wont be able to do it all myself. How would one get the word out about requesting editing help? Tehw1k1 05:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Could we please have these broken down by region, for example Xbox was second overall in World and US sales but actually 3rd behind Gamecube in Both Japan and EU territorys, shows regional preferences. 83.104.138.141 17:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
32-64 bit 5th gen=next generation 128bit 6th gen=power generation Online based 7th gen=new generation — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asfd666 ( talk • contribs) 01:31, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
The best selling game on PS2 is not Gran Turismo: A-Spec, it's Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. Grand Theft Auto: Vice City sold 15 million copies, and Gran Turismo: A-Spec sold 14.88 million copies. So please change it or I will be forced to take action. The King Gemini ( talk) 20:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
The sooner the ps2 gets discounied the better, I'm fed up of people buying that system when they could get a 360 or ps3 or even a wii, anything but the ps2! But seriously, there must be sources somewhere on google to say that the ps2 is aging. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool ( talk) 17:46, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The introduction says that the sixth generation hasn't ended yet but the info box says it ended in 2006. Which is it? 192.204.5.68 ( talk) 02:25, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Now in 2012, there's a bit of confusion on this matter. The History Of Video Games box at the bottom of the page says "Sixth (1998–)", but the introductory paragraph states both "there are no announced PS2 titles yet to be released for any regions and Sony has quietly discontinued production of the system, marking the end of the sixth generation" and "the PlayStation 2, meanwhile, continued to get newly released titles through fall 2012". Is this generation over or not? JaffaCakeLover ( talk) 17:25, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Official sources say otherwise. Sony officially discontinued the PS2 on January 4, 2013. It doesn't matter when shipments stop, for Wikipedia goes by the official confirmation, not speculation of what will happen next. TJD2 ( talk) 20:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I like the way that there is a picture of all the console controls and another picture of the consoles themselfs. I think this should be done to other generations, like the 7th (though of cause the Wii does not have a controller so it should be replaced with the 'Wiimote'). I can't do it myself though, as i don't have the three main consoles.-- 77.99.231.37 ( talk) 15:23, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
poorly made dreamcast pic, my dreamcast beside my xbox looks whiter than even it. Also. Every picture on wikipedia but this dreamcast picture shows the latest version by its maker. -- 69.255.42.105 ( talk) 15:23, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of History of video game consoles (sixth generation)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "SonyPress":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 07:28, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I fairly well remember paying 249€, not 149€. Please check your sources. - Anon, 10:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
According to a BBC News report on the launch - the launch price in Europe was €199 in Europe and £129 in the UK. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1963749.stm Bryces ( talk) 13:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't remember 699usd and 799gb
That's a bit outlandish
Is fix it but on phone — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.160.23 ( talk) 17:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Why is the date till 2013? why is 2013 the finish date when the latest date of discontinuation is 2008 apart from the PS2 which should not count as it had a successor in the next generation shouldn't the end date should be then what is the logic behind 2013? -- 81.102.76.9 ( talk) 18:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)